Talk:Eventing

New regulations

New regulations on xcountry fences. See USEA on Frangible Fences http://useventing.com/resources/files/docs/frangpin_handbook_v8.pdf —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.203.190.144 (talk) 06:42, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Building Cross Country Jumps for 3 Day Eventing Course in Oregon

Hi Eventing Community: Could someone direct me to a good official source of Cross Country Jump specifications that might be used by the Lake Oswego Hunt in Oregon to serve as a design guideline for our 3 Day Eventing Cross Country course?

We need to expand our Training, Preliminary and Intermediate jumps and an authoritative book or two would be greatly appreciated.

Thank you, George Porter Vice President Lake Oswego Hunt

George.Porter@yahoo.com

Thoroughbred

Someone said that TBxWB or full warmbloods were doing much better due to the short format. I disagree, there has been a lot of talk that just as much stamina is needed for the short format, due to the increased speed and number of obstacles on the same length of course. TBs still are the favorites for upper level competition. So I removed the bit about the WB. If you have any stats on the issue, please respond. Eventer

Contradictory information

The main article Cross country section contains inaccuracies regarding what a CCI and CIC event are - this is described correctly further down the article in the International section but perhaps the earlier text should be revised. Similarly the long and short format debate is now over as all events now run short format, so the context needs adjusting (plus the initial description of short format is wrong).Weasley one 12:52, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

If you can fix it in a well-worded, verifiable manner (citing to the rule book is particularly helpful, though I notice no one else has) I say go for it! I'm not an eventer, so better you than me! Montanabw 17:28, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

I think I took care of all the short/long format stuff (much of which was repeated several times in the article). There was one particular poster who very much wanted to preach to long format. I love the long-format too, I think we lost something when we took out A, B, and C, but shouting out your views on wikipedia aint going to change the FEI's or IOC's decision, folks. Sorry, but its time to move on. And the warmblood breeders in Europe aren't the bad guys in this fight, either. Eventer 04:29, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

As a sidenote, one of the pictures states something about "eventer's grease" and its ability to help horses slide over obstacles--this seems completely absurd to me, and I don't quite understand this concept. Perhaps this can be elaborated on or changed? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 198.103.96.11 (talk) 14:04, August 22, 2007 (UTC)

Well, dont know how else to put it. That's what it does: makes the legs more slippery so if the horse doesnt pick his legs quite high enough he'll be more likely to slide over the fence then get caught. Reduces friction. Never used it (no need to at the level I compete at), so I really cant elaborate more. Eventer 18:12, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

Clarity

To be clear, the same horse and rider complete all three phases of the event for a single combined score, right? Also, it doesn't seem possible that the same horses that have been trained to dressage can also do those jumps, so I'm wondering if the dressage phase is somewhat less demanding than the dressage performed in competition when dressage is all that you are doing (if you know what I'm asking)? -ErinHowarth (talk) 03:42, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Yes - the same horse and rider combination complete all three phases to achieve a combined final score. For the dressage, this is eluded to in the article when it mentions that Grand Prix movements (which are the highest level of pure dressage) are not used in Eventing dressage. You are right, to some extant - the highest level of pure dressage is more complex and 'difficult' than the highest level of eventing dressage, however the dressage in eventing is, in fact, quite high level in itself and requires a high degree of training of both rider and horse.

The original goal of eventing back in the 'day was to test the perfect light cavalry horse, able to travel cross-country over rough terrain, jump and then manuver with agility in combat (the roots of dressage). As ALLUDED to (grin), these are versatile horses. Montanabw^(talk) 20:10, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Elimination for falling on the cross country phase

Before wading in to make an edit and getting embroiled in an edit war, I thought I'd post here. FEI international events (CIC and CCI) now impose elimination at the first fall of a rider, regardless of where on the course it happened (click here, go to article 532). However not all national eventing associations have adopted this rule, which leads to difference of opinion/fact and difficulty in representing a simple case in the article, unless each national association is treated seperately. There appears to be a lot written by users with a national bias, but in a context that assumes universal agreement (which is not always the case). We are all most likely familiar with our national variations but they don't all agree, which is why a summary article that addresses rules and regs can easily become a mess. I propose that the FEI rules be considered 'universal' and national differences be stated as such. Weasley one (talk) 12:58, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

I find that footnoting ends a lot of edit wars. What the whole article needs are specific sources to the rules for the various organizations, at least FEI, USEA and BE. Problem is, none of the regulars at WEPQ has had the time to do it, so we have to deal with the "hit and run" edits. If you want to do so, my suggestion is GO FOR IT! I recommend you make the section on rules cite directly to the FEI rule book by chapter and verse,with footnotes, then have subsections titled something like "Rule variations" or "USEA rule differences" and "British Eventing rule differences" that summarizes the main ways other mainstream national organizations depart from FEI. If necessary, sections on Australia or other major English-speaking nations that compete in eventing could be noted, though the laundry list could quickly grow endless. Or, I have sometimes said something like, "there are variations from the international rules in competitions at the national and regional levels, mainly in the areas of X, Y, and Z..." I think the solution is, one way or the other, to "teach the argument," being real specific and having good sources. One example of where I added material from various nations and organizations is the height section of Pony. Feel free to swipe the concept there if it helps! Good luck and holler if you need some help! Montanabw^(talk) 17:40, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

"Expand French"

The documentation for this says "To mark an article, tag it with:

", not "tag the talk page of the article with ..."--Felix Folio Secundus (talk) 19:44, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

I've seen it mostly on talk pages in actual use. Too much edit tagging in the article namespace discourages readers. The tag will alert those who care, wherever it lands. Montanabw^(talk) 20:45, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

I have seen it many times on article pages and only twice recently on talk pages. Readers having some knowledge of French may be informed by the tag if they read the article whithout also reading the talk page. The best way to reduce the number of tags on a article is to address one of the matters to which they relate.--Felix Folio Secundus (talk) 05:28, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

Feel free to work on it. We have over 2000 articles in WPEQ and most of them have some sort of tag. Montanabw^(talk) 20:42, 19 July 2011 (UTC)